Foreign language bibles cannot be translated into 16th-Century English, so I guess only those who speak English will be in heaven. Claiming that the KJV is “the most accurate” shows a woeful ignorance of the subject.
Dr. James Vernon McGee, famous radio preacher of the past, made the statement that the “any bible translation that is not the King James translation is from the devil.” Pretty bold, considering that the Word is the Sword of the Spirit (Eph 6:17), and blasphemy of the same is close on the heels of dogmatic criticism.
The KJV is a good bible, but it’s God’s truth that saves, not the arrangement of words and their syntax. I’ve heard folks say that 16th Century English “was what Jesus spoke.” Another once told me, “It’s the language we’ll be speaking in Heaven.” Some think that prayers should be prayed in Old English. This extremism turns folks away from Christianity.
Do you think today’s young people will embrace a bible they can barely understand? In our video-driven culture, today’s youth struggle with modern English. How much less will they understand or be interested in something written centuries ago?
For a more thorough discussion on the infallibility issue of the King James bible, there's a scholarly article written by Robert Joyner here.
Here is an excerpt from the translators of the Authorized KJV. Those who think it's wrong to read another translation, read closely:
Another thing we think good to admonish thee of, gentle reader: that we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe that some learned men somewhere have been as exact as they could that way. Truly, that we might not vary from the sense of that which we had translated before, if the word signified the same thing in both places (for there be some words that be not of the same sense everywhere), we were especially careful, and made a conscience according to our duty. ...For is the kingdom of God become words or syllables? Why should we be in bondage to them if we may be free, use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as commodiously?